Geez I hate this!! The Republicans should have held, let Obama and the Dems run out of money it they want to go there. Then vote to impeach Obama if he failed to service the debt and blow the 14th amendment. The final show down is way the hell over due.
That's the spirit! Fuck everything, let's set it on fire! Cause you and I man, we are 20 years old, and we are anarchists! Let's fuck some shit up! barfo
A fix my friend, a fix. No authority to barrow, means live within our means. It is possible, it has been done.
Live within our means? Do you remember what country you are living in? EDIT: Or rather, which economic system we currently have in place?
This makes me want to donate money to every teabagging (invective of choice) that runs in 2014 and onward. One of the reasons that spending can't be cut is because we have trillions tied up in overages on programs that can't be cut. Medicare/caid overruns alone would pay for entire DoD/DHS/DoE/NASA. But people don't want to have their FICA raised enough to pay for it (which would jump from the 12% range (of which they pay half) to the 27% range. Populist opinion is "raise taxes on the rich and very rich". This isn't a "very rich" people thing, it's a "300M people want a lifestyle (SS/Medicare/Medicaid/now-PPACA) but don't want to pay for it" thing. Go ahead and raise taxes--the people making that much will continue to find loopholes. But even if they didn't, it's basic math. The 100k people making $2M or more can't pay for the social services, national defense and infrastructure of 300M. As an example, 250k people earned $1,000,000 or more. People love to state how about 1200 didn't pay a penny in tax. But what they don't say is that the total of those incomes was $729B, or not even enough to fund the Medicare overrun if you taxed them 100%. Our DEFICIT is $1.6T with millionaires paying ~25% on average. If you taxed every millionaire 100%, you wouldn't cover 1/3 of the deficit. This is one of the many reasons I am glad that PPACA was being blocked. Passing a horribly-constructed panacaea (no matter how good or bad the intent), that will not be easily able to be revoked when the costs are 8x the intake (like Medicare/Caid) is irresponsible and inappropriate. If you want people to have "affordable care", then do things that address care like a) more doctors and nurse practitioners, b) lower drug costs, c) no mandatory insurance, d) no preventative care in the emergency room, etc. I'd much rather have my taxes be raised for more doctors and clinics and shots for kids than to have my (now mandatory) insurance rates jacked up to pay some insurance company, with no net increase in care. Even during the government "shutdown", SS is getting paid (even though it's not a break-even proposition anymore), Medicare/Caid are being funded (even though they're almost a trillion dollars PER YEAR overspent, or roughly what a decade of war cost), the interest on debt is being paid, etc. Poorly-thought out mandatory social programs are the largest outpouring of our government--triple what education, defense and science/research spending are combined. I just found 144 representatives and 18 senators to donate to during the next campaign. All I've seen today is how "the Tea Party lost"/"should be arrested"/"wasted $24B dollars"--what happens in February when the debt ceiling is hit again? For that matter, why wasn't the compromised 2011 debt ceiling raise enough? Even after the "atom bomb" of sequestration, we're at the point of either raising the debt ceiling or "defaulting".
It wasn't being blocked. It was just being whined about. Same again, I imagine. Why would it be any different? barfo
Of course it was being blocked. Eleven separate bills were passed by the House that funded the entire government, except funding and/or including a delay for PPACA. It couldn't be implemented--hence "being blocked". Why would it? It wouldn't, because "the Tea Party lost". Should it? I, at least, think so.
I think you wrong about that. First, what the House passes is often pretty irrelevant - note the 40-odd votes to kill Obamacare that had no effect whatsoever, and also those 11 bills that you mention that went straight into the Senate trash can. Secondly, funding for Obamacare was largely unaffected during the shutdown. Were your submarine activities "being blocked" during the shutdown? Just like your part of the government, Obamacare kept going during the shutdown. barfo
http://www.davemanuel.com/history-of-deficits-and-surpluses-in-the-united-states.php I just wanted to share this information. Feel free to interpret as you will. =]
Yeah right. Just like when the US had it's credit score downgraded last time and treasury yields went down (treasury prices went up)? People and countries poured money INTO the US when the US threatened the global economy.
Yes, if one chooses to pay only certain bills, those bills get paid. The bills one chooses not to pay don't get paid. It's amazing. The trouble is, you don't get to choose which bills get paid. And neither do I. barfo
That is very interesting, I had not heard this before. Just curious what you think about this situation and the money lost from the shutdown?
I think this is all political grandstanding on both sides and the media blowing things out of proportion. What money "lost from the shutdown"?
